• inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    145
    ·
    3 months ago

    There are other people pointing out all the pratical reasons why this isn’t the case.

    But I like the spirit and vibe of this idea, good shower thought.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The olympics don’t take only one day, the paralympics are also a thing, as are the winter olympics. The olympics that happen on leap years are the summer olympics and February isn’t in summer.

    Early voting takes longer than a day, and there are elections other than presidential elections that happen with greater frequency.

    And February 29 doesn’t happen on years ending in 00 unless the year ends in 000.

    EDIT: scroll down to see how confidently wrong I was about leap years!

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      3 months ago

      And February 29 doesn’t happen on years ending in 00 unless the year ends in 000.

      That’s not correct. Centuries are not leap years, unless they’re divisible by 400 (not 1000). So, 2400 will be a leap year, but 3000 will not.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      To add to this, weather conditions on November 5 are likely to be more temperate than February 29. November 5 can definitely still have bad weather, but you would be making in-person voting overall objectively statistically more difficult by pushing it into the end of February thanks to snow, where November doesn’t even crack the top 5 months for the most snowfall (and we’re talking early November here).

      You would also be giving some president/Congress three-ish extra months nine-ish fewer months of a term for literally no reason by shifting it all the way to February 29, unless you wanted to roll out some decades-long scheme to incrementally push it there.

      Edit: that also leaves the fact that you would have (presumably the first day of) one of the most watched events on Earth taking place on the same day as the general election, meaning arguably one of the few times when minute-by-minute 24-hour news coverage is necessary for the election, you’d get it interspersed with a ton of Olympics stuff, and you’d likely also have a decent chunk of people staying home to watch the Olympics instead of voting, further depressing turnout in addition to possible weather issues.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Oh wait, yeah, you’re right, I accounted for “late the next February” without taking into account that wouldn’t be a leap year. Sometimes math escapes me.

    • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      3 months ago

      In 2000, there was a February 29, because it was a multiple of 4, and despite being a multiple of 100 it was also a multiple of 400. It was the exception of the exception of the exception. My parents signed their divorce on that day. Which makes it extra memorable for me. What a day 😀 !!

  • BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The Olympics you know are in fact Summer Olympics. Guess what there’s winter Olympics. Probably 29th Feb is a bit late to catch enough good snow

  • philluminati@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    A leap year is every 4 years, but not every 400 years. If you could only vote on Feb 29 you’d have gone 8 years without a vote between 1996 and 2004.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not quite—it’s every four years, excluding years divisible by 100, but not excluding years divisible by 400. So 2000 was a leap year, but it was the first century in 400 years for which that was the case (using the Gregorian calendar).

    • mipadaitu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      2000 was a leap year. Source: I was there.

      The math on the 400 thing is the other way around.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      you’d have gone 8 years without a vote between 1996 and 2004

      On second thought, OP is absolutely correct and we need to invent a time machine to fix this mistake.

  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Elections happen all over the world at different times for different lengths.

    Why would we all sync the Olympics to America?